For one data point, 8 out of the 25 draft decks that went 3-0 in the first draft at GP Lyon were green. I also seem to recall that the stats from Pro Tour drafts showed very similar statistics.
In a perfectly color-balanced environment, you'd expect 10/25 decks, +/- some random variation, to be green, as opposed to 8/25. That's low, but not necessarily lower than can be explained by random chance. If the composition of 3-0 draft decks is hovering around 1/3 green across multiple events, then we could be more sure that green really is underperforming.
I think actual data supports the conclusion that green is the worst color. I don't think it comes close to supporting Turtenwald's assertion that you should pretend it doesn't exist, however. You'd still expect some green decks to 3-0 due to random chance even if he were right, of course, but if it were so bad that you should avoid it even when it's clearly wide open and you're being passed powerful green rares and uncommons, the stats should be "disastrous" rather than "apparently underperforming."
If we posit some hypotheses, we can test them statistically.
I can tell you that, barring far lower variance than is normal in these distributions, 8/25 3-0 Green decks doesn't prove a thing about Green being worse if the 'average assumed' is 10/25.
Ironically, the more respected pros tell you that a color is unplayable in draft, the more playable it becomes, as impressionable mid-level players fill drafts avoid it like the plague and allow you to scoop up all the cards they're so petrified to take.
(That said, his point stands: green is far and away the worst color in the draft format, and at high levels you'd almost certainly do better to try and avoid it altogether.)
In retrospect I think I experienced this effect my last draft.
I opened Veteran Warleader, Ob Nixilis Reignited and Beastcaller savant in my three packs. I drafted all of them, but initially had no intention of playing Ob Nixilis, he just was in a pack that had no standout Uncommons and I decided I didn't want to play against Ob.
Erufuun: Actually, at a certain point, if enough people follow this guy's advice, no, one person will not end up with 'all the Green stuff'. It'll all wheel/similar, and then people all pick them up as last picks because nobody wants them, and everyone's decks suffer.
This does not match with what people are saying on this forum about the Draft environment.
If you believe that WotC is designing Limited deck archetypes for us these days (and there's some evidence for that), and if you do as this guy suggests and simply do not draft Green, that means you have only 6 archetypes to choose from... for 8 players. I would like to know the two two-color archetypes in BFZ that are deep enough to have two players draft it and both still get good decks. Because if that isn't able to happen, this guy's conclusion is simply wrong.
Erufuun: I think you give him much more credit than he is due.
He didn't say that his argument was 'his choice' and that people shouldn't listen to him. He is, quite literally, telling everyone that they should fight over one of six archetypes rather than play Green. That is his thesis.
If you do not agree with his thesis, fine, but don't try to portray it as other than it is.
While I actually do like the format, I think the biggest problem by far with it is that they really didn't support Eldrazi ramp at all.
Ramping into giant Eldrazi is just not a viable strategy. Every set has some unplayables, it's just disappointing that this time the unplayables represent half of the sets flavor.
While I actually do like the format, I think the biggest problem by far with it is that they really didn't support Eldrazi ramp at all.
Ramping into giant Eldrazi is just not a viable strategy. Every set has some unplayables, it's just disappointing that this time the unplayables represent half of the sets flavor.
That's not true. I've done well with that strategy all 3 times I've tried it (each time spurred on by uncommons/rares/mythics). Just listened to a podcast in which LSV said he liked it.
It is doable, the cards just aren't there to do it reliably so you have to pick your spots. It isn't like the UW deck, or the devoid deck, where the critical mass of good cards allows you to draft them and know you are going to end up with a solid deck much more often than not.
While I actually do like the format, I think the biggest problem by far with it is that they really didn't support Eldrazi ramp at all.
Ramping into giant Eldrazi is just not a viable strategy. Every set has some unplayables, it's just disappointing that this time the unplayables represent half of the sets flavor.
That's not true. I've done well with that strategy all 3 times I've tried it (each time spurred on by uncommons/rares/mythics). Just listened to a podcast in which LSV said he liked it.
It is doable, the cards just aren't there to do it reliably so you have to pick your spots. It isn't like the UW deck, or the devoid deck, where the critical mass of good cards allows you to draft them and know you are going to end up with a solid deck much more often than not.
I have played twenty something drafts and have yet to see an Eldrazi over 7 mana cast, nor have I received the cards that would make me want to move into that strategy. The payoff just isn't there on the big spells, and the enablers at common aren't powerful enough on their own. There aren't any Kozilek's Predators, Emraukul's Hatchers, or Overgrown Battlements.
While I actually do like the format, I think the biggest problem by far with it is that they really didn't support Eldrazi ramp at all.
Ramping into giant Eldrazi is just not a viable strategy. Every set has some unplayables, it's just disappointing that this time the unplayables represent half of the sets flavor.
That's not true. I've done well with that strategy all 3 times I've tried it (each time spurred on by uncommons/rares/mythics). Just listened to a podcast in which LSV said he liked it.
It is doable, the cards just aren't there to do it reliably so you have to pick your spots. It isn't like the UW deck, or the devoid deck, where the critical mass of good cards allows you to draft them and know you are going to end up with a solid deck much more often than not.
I have played twenty something drafts and have yet to see an Eldrazi over 7 mana cast, nor have I received the cards that would make me want to move into that strategy. The payoff just isn't there on the big spells, and the enablers at common aren't powerful enough on their own. There aren't any Kozilek's Predators, Emraukul's Hatchers, or Overgrown Battlements.
And I've cast D.Twins in two different decks, and Ulamog in another. Those decks went 2-1, 3-0, 3-0.
The 2 green scion makers that make 2 each, Kozi's Channeler, and then the other random ramp effects and scion makers at common actually add up really fast. Throw in a Hedron Archive, a Spawning Bed, and/or other higher end ramp like Brood Monitor and Nissa's Renewal and it isn't difficult to get to 10. In fact in 2 of my decks I'd say that it was literally never a problem.
Erufuun: I think you give him much more credit than he is due.
He didn't say that his argument was 'his choice' and that people shouldn't listen to him. He is, quite literally, telling everyone that they should fight over one of six archetypes rather than play Green. That is his thesis.
If you do not agree with his thesis, fine, but don't try to portray it as other than it is.
Maybe you're right and I'm giving him more credit than he is due - then again his strong choice of words tries to provoke discussion, which he accomplished. The rest is reading between the lines - but maybe I'm reading more into it than there actually is.
@spairy
Eldrazi Ramp is a viable strategy. It's a delicate one, but the enablers are right there, at common even and many of those not even high picks - because many of them are green. Between Call the Scions, Eyeless Watcher, Kozilek's Channeler (!!), Brood Monitor (U) and Hedron Archive (U) it's entirely possible to take the route, even if not supporting two players per table.
Mind you, it wouldn't be my first choice to go that route (as I rather dislike ramp) but if I open Ulamog, I'm going that route. If I can pick up a Tajuru Warcaller I can get another win condition for the deck as well.
Yeah, that's why getting one of the Twins/Ulamog to ramp to is huge. One answer from the opponent doesn't ruin your day. And Plated Crusher is great in the archetype too. I'm ok playing the other Eldrazi in the deck, but if your "big game" is a Devastator or Breaker then you are probably in trouble.
I mostly agree, although I think it has a couple cards that are quite playable. Call the Scions is good. It's also easily splashable. My last draft I went 2-0-1 (ID) with UB colorless splashing green for only a pair of Call the Scions.
While I actually do like the format, I think the biggest problem by far with it is that they really didn't support Eldrazi ramp at all.
Ramping into giant Eldrazi is just not a viable strategy. Every set has some unplayables, it's just disappointing that this time the unplayables represent half of the sets flavor.
That's not true. I've done well with that strategy all 3 times I've tried it (each time spurred on by uncommons/rares/mythics). Just listened to a podcast in which LSV said he liked it.
It is doable, the cards just aren't there to do it reliably so you have to pick your spots. It isn't like the UW deck, or the devoid deck, where the critical mass of good cards allows you to draft them and know you are going to end up with a solid deck much more often than not.
I have played twenty something drafts and have yet to see an Eldrazi over 7 mana cast, nor have I received the cards that would make me want to move into that strategy. The payoff just isn't there on the big spells, and the enablers at common aren't powerful enough on their own. There aren't any Kozilek's Predators, Emraukul's Hatchers, or Overgrown Battlements.
I am shocked that you have truly played twenty something drafts and have yet to see an Eldrazi over 7 mana cast. I see it in almost every draft, around 1 out of every 4 or 5 decks I play against as an estimate has an 8+ drop eldrazi in it. I have cast several 8+ drop eldrazi, though not as frequently as I might have expected given the pre-release hype about it.
Erufuun: Posting something inflammatory to 'provoke discussion' is more or less saying that he's intentionally trolling the entire MTG community, no?
IOW, I despise people who feel they need to use hyperbole to provoke discussion.
bokchoykn: I like that you are using analysis to try to look at this issue, but I think your approach has two major flaws:
1) BFZ is not a color-centric set, but an archetype-centric set for Limited. As such, doing a color-centric analysis is actually not appropriate. It is entirely possible, though I would say not desirable, that all of the best cards in Gx archetypes are actually in other colors, and yet those archetypes work perfectly fine contra others. In that case, you can see the shallowness of Green and yet it not have the impact on the table that you claim.
2) EV is not really a good measure for anything more than 'goodstuff'. As one example, the EV of Call the Scions is wildly different if you're playing GB than GR. EV analysis relies on random mixing, which isn't even true of pack distribution, much less how people choose the cards.
Based on the two points above, I have to believe that an unstated assumption of your analysis is that BFZ is not a synergistic environment, which is contra to the prevailing wisdom.
I've pretty much gone all in on Owen's never draft green strategy. I started out this format with some pretty abysmal results, going 1-2 three out of my first four drafts. Two out of three those 1-2 drafts were base green decks. I've done five drafts since I started avoiding green entirely, getting two 3-0's, two 2-1's and a 1-1 in a single elimination pod. It could just be coincidence, or just my increasing knowledge that explain the improved win record, but I don't think so. Looking at Owen's list of top commons for each color, green's top common is roughly on par with red's seventh best common. That's just terrible. Green has literally zero commons that are reasonable first picks; pretty much everything is just filler level. In one of my recent drafts I first picked an Eldrazi Skyspawner over Woodland Wanderer and I never regretted it. Wanderer is great in its own right but it's going to require you to fill your deck with mediocre green cards, while Spawner lets you surround it with other consistently good cards.
bokchoykn: I like that you are using analysis to try to look at this issue, but I think your approach has two major flaws:
1) BFZ is not a color-centric set, but an archetype-centric set for Limited. As such, doing a color-centric analysis is actually not appropriate. It is entirely possible, though I would say not desirable, that all of the best cards in Gx archetypes are actually in other colors, and yet those archetypes work perfectly fine contra others. In that case, you can see the shallowness of Green and yet it not have the impact on the table that you claim.
2) EV is not really a good measure for anything more than 'goodstuff'. As one example, the EV of Call the Scions is wildly different if you're playing GB than GR. EV analysis relies on random mixing, which isn't even true of pack distribution, much less how people choose the cards.
Based on the two points above, I have to believe that an unstated assumption of your analysis is that BFZ is not a synergistic environment, which is contra to the prevailing wisdom.
Yeah, PV mentioned the same thing and you're both completely right. I acknowledge these flaws for sure and mentioned in the closing comments that this is only scratching the surface on this topic because it's much more complex than this and it's difficult to quantify something so abstract like synergy.
My aim was to take into account the synergies and archetypes in BFZ by reflecting them in the rankings of the cards. For example, in a vacuum, a card like Kalastria Healer or Mist Intruder are trash. However, when put in context of the rest of the format, these two cards become good and I ranked them as such.
So, while a card's EV fluctuates based on the cards the deck that it's played in and that's not something that can be quantified, the idea behind of the first section where I ranked the cards was meant to take that into consideration. The foundation that the entire analysis is built upon is my personal rankings, which are subjective and card rankings/pick orders will always vary from person to person.
The intent wasn't so much to mathematically prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that drafting Green is bad. It's more to show my conclusion, and the train of thought I used to arrive at that conclusion. If someone else's rankings are different and they feel differently about Call the Scions or any other card than I do, their conclusions may be different as well.
This type of analysis will never be conclusive or perfect, but I mainly wanted to put things like color depth into perspective, and how it should influence the way you draft a weak color.
For what it's worth, in this week's Limited Resources Marshall and LSV both intimated that in their opinion the biggest shortcoming of the format was that Eldrazi Ramp wasn't supported. They hinted that this will likely be the subject of a later LR episode.
I did not listen to the podcast but while I have believed for several weeks that green was by far the worst color in BFZ, and I am glad to see now that this seems to be the prevailing view, I happen to believe that the eldrazi ramp deck is a viable G/B deck which has fine support in draft as long as you are not fighting someone else at the table for it.
Green has two common multiple-scion creators which are easy to draft late (if no-one else is drafting the deck) in addition to the very good uncommon Brood Monitor, both G and B have other cards to create more scions, and there are several very good eldrazi to ramp into. On top of that, if you combine that strategy of building out a bunch of scions with Swarm Surge and Tajuru Warcaller then you have multiple ways of winning, using the scions to ramp or using them to just overrun wide.
The way to draft this deck, in my inexpert view, is to either start with the mythic rare Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger (the best eldrazi to ramp into and a card I would never ever pass since it's worth 10+ tickets) or possibly Breaker of Armies or Brood Monitor if the pack is otherwise weak, and go from there, or if passed a somewhat late one of these cards then you can move in. I would not enter a draft thinking of drafting this deck, but if it falls into my lap then I will take it.
What I would try to avoid is splashing for another color because that dilutes the synergy and could lead to mana issues. There will bound to be some filler like Oran-Rief Invoker or Giant Spider but that is true with most any deck, and they fulfill a purpose as long as they do not hurt the curve much.
I have only drafted that deck once out of my 20-30 drafts (since I avoid green so much), and I was not able to get as many huge eldrazi I wanted (my 14 scions would have liked more than 1 7-drop and Ulamog), so that was probably an example of not enough support but in most drafts I pass plenty of 7+ drop eldrazi.
bokchoykn: While valid, Magic Drafting is a pretty good example of a Complex Adaptive System, and I've never made a secret over the fact that I run the 8-Ways to gather data.
I am starting to work up some analysis of the draft so that I can release it when the draft is over.
I think there are lessons, and see what happens with the 2nd BFZ 8-Way.
bokchoykn: While valid, Magic Drafting is a pretty good example of a Complex Adaptive System, and I've never made a secret over the fact that I run the 8-Ways to gather data.
I am starting to work up some analysis of the draft so that I can release it when the draft is over.
I think there are lessons, and see what happens with the 2nd BFZ 8-Way.
Oh cool. I've never heard of it. Is it a draft simulator? I've tried some before, but don't know which is the best one.
bokchoykn: 8-Ways are something we do here @ MTGS where we have 8 teams of players who do a draft. I administrate it, and they do all the picks.
In essence, it's a physical simulation of a draft (and I use actual packs I open as source material). It's quite realistic, but the tradeoff is that it is very slow. We only get to do 1-2 for each draft season.
I'm not convinced. Green might be the worst color in BFZ, but it's far from unplayable. G/R landfall and G/B scions are both quite powerful decks and fairly easy to assemble.
For what it's worth, in this week's Limited Resources Marshall and LSV both intimated that in their opinion the biggest shortcoming of the format was that Eldrazi Ramp wasn't supported. They hinted that this will likely be the subject of a later LR episode.
I think this is the biggest problem is green. There's too many (or maybe not enough) card slots supporting archetypes that just aren't good. Eldrazi Ramp sucks unless you get Ulamog, and U/G converge sucks no matter what. Green's main strength in limited is combat/creature superiority but you don't get that in BFZ because the color it stretch too thin without many all-around solid commons that could go in any deck. Maybe if the archetypes were pushed or supported more they would work out, but it ended up diluting the pool of commons.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In a perfectly color-balanced environment, you'd expect 10/25 decks, +/- some random variation, to be green, as opposed to 8/25. That's low, but not necessarily lower than can be explained by random chance. If the composition of 3-0 draft decks is hovering around 1/3 green across multiple events, then we could be more sure that green really is underperforming.
I think actual data supports the conclusion that green is the worst color. I don't think it comes close to supporting Turtenwald's assertion that you should pretend it doesn't exist, however. You'd still expect some green decks to 3-0 due to random chance even if he were right, of course, but if it were so bad that you should avoid it even when it's clearly wide open and you're being passed powerful green rares and uncommons, the stats should be "disastrous" rather than "apparently underperforming."
I can tell you that, barring far lower variance than is normal in these distributions, 8/25 3-0 Green decks doesn't prove a thing about Green being worse if the 'average assumed' is 10/25.
In retrospect I think I experienced this effect my last draft.
I opened Veteran Warleader, Ob Nixilis Reignited and Beastcaller savant in my three packs. I drafted all of them, but initially had no intention of playing Ob Nixilis, he just was in a pack that had no standout Uncommons and I decided I didn't want to play against Ob.
I eventually went UG converge because I was handed Bring to Light, Scatter to the Winds, Ugin's Insight, Lumbering Falls, Greenwarden of Murasa and Brood Butcher. My final deck almost looked like a stripped down 40 card bring to light constructed deck and played surprisingly well (I guess because everyone else was avoiding green like plague).
This does not match with what people are saying on this forum about the Draft environment.
If you believe that WotC is designing Limited deck archetypes for us these days (and there's some evidence for that), and if you do as this guy suggests and simply do not draft Green, that means you have only 6 archetypes to choose from... for 8 players. I would like to know the two two-color archetypes in BFZ that are deep enough to have two players draft it and both still get good decks. Because if that isn't able to happen, this guy's conclusion is simply wrong.
He didn't say that his argument was 'his choice' and that people shouldn't listen to him. He is, quite literally, telling everyone that they should fight over one of six archetypes rather than play Green. That is his thesis.
If you do not agree with his thesis, fine, but don't try to portray it as other than it is.
Ramping into giant Eldrazi is just not a viable strategy. Every set has some unplayables, it's just disappointing that this time the unplayables represent half of the sets flavor.
That's not true. I've done well with that strategy all 3 times I've tried it (each time spurred on by uncommons/rares/mythics). Just listened to a podcast in which LSV said he liked it.
It is doable, the cards just aren't there to do it reliably so you have to pick your spots. It isn't like the UW deck, or the devoid deck, where the critical mass of good cards allows you to draft them and know you are going to end up with a solid deck much more often than not.
I have played twenty something drafts and have yet to see an Eldrazi over 7 mana cast, nor have I received the cards that would make me want to move into that strategy. The payoff just isn't there on the big spells, and the enablers at common aren't powerful enough on their own. There aren't any Kozilek's Predators, Emraukul's Hatchers, or Overgrown Battlements.
And I've cast D.Twins in two different decks, and Ulamog in another. Those decks went 2-1, 3-0, 3-0.
The 2 green scion makers that make 2 each, Kozi's Channeler, and then the other random ramp effects and scion makers at common actually add up really fast. Throw in a Hedron Archive, a Spawning Bed, and/or other higher end ramp like Brood Monitor and Nissa's Renewal and it isn't difficult to get to 10. In fact in 2 of my decks I'd say that it was literally never a problem.
Yeah, that's why getting one of the Twins/Ulamog to ramp to is huge. One answer from the opponent doesn't ruin your day. And Plated Crusher is great in the archetype too. I'm ok playing the other Eldrazi in the deck, but if your "big game" is a Devastator or Breaker then you are probably in trouble.
I am shocked that you have truly played twenty something drafts and have yet to see an Eldrazi over 7 mana cast. I see it in almost every draft, around 1 out of every 4 or 5 decks I play against as an estimate has an 8+ drop eldrazi in it. I have cast several 8+ drop eldrazi, though not as frequently as I might have expected given the pre-release hype about it.
Is Green Unplayable? An analysis on BFZ Green.
IOW, I despise people who feel they need to use hyperbole to provoke discussion.
bokchoykn: I like that you are using analysis to try to look at this issue, but I think your approach has two major flaws:
1) BFZ is not a color-centric set, but an archetype-centric set for Limited. As such, doing a color-centric analysis is actually not appropriate. It is entirely possible, though I would say not desirable, that all of the best cards in Gx archetypes are actually in other colors, and yet those archetypes work perfectly fine contra others. In that case, you can see the shallowness of Green and yet it not have the impact on the table that you claim.
2) EV is not really a good measure for anything more than 'goodstuff'. As one example, the EV of Call the Scions is wildly different if you're playing GB than GR. EV analysis relies on random mixing, which isn't even true of pack distribution, much less how people choose the cards.
Based on the two points above, I have to believe that an unstated assumption of your analysis is that BFZ is not a synergistic environment, which is contra to the prevailing wisdom.
Yeah, PV mentioned the same thing and you're both completely right. I acknowledge these flaws for sure and mentioned in the closing comments that this is only scratching the surface on this topic because it's much more complex than this and it's difficult to quantify something so abstract like synergy.
My aim was to take into account the synergies and archetypes in BFZ by reflecting them in the rankings of the cards. For example, in a vacuum, a card like Kalastria Healer or Mist Intruder are trash. However, when put in context of the rest of the format, these two cards become good and I ranked them as such.
So, while a card's EV fluctuates based on the cards the deck that it's played in and that's not something that can be quantified, the idea behind of the first section where I ranked the cards was meant to take that into consideration. The foundation that the entire analysis is built upon is my personal rankings, which are subjective and card rankings/pick orders will always vary from person to person.
The intent wasn't so much to mathematically prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that drafting Green is bad. It's more to show my conclusion, and the train of thought I used to arrive at that conclusion. If someone else's rankings are different and they feel differently about Call the Scions or any other card than I do, their conclusions may be different as well.
This type of analysis will never be conclusive or perfect, but I mainly wanted to put things like color depth into perspective, and how it should influence the way you draft a weak color.
Green has two common multiple-scion creators which are easy to draft late (if no-one else is drafting the deck) in addition to the very good uncommon Brood Monitor, both G and B have other cards to create more scions, and there are several very good eldrazi to ramp into. On top of that, if you combine that strategy of building out a bunch of scions with Swarm Surge and Tajuru Warcaller then you have multiple ways of winning, using the scions to ramp or using them to just overrun wide.
The way to draft this deck, in my inexpert view, is to either start with the mythic rare Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger (the best eldrazi to ramp into and a card I would never ever pass since it's worth 10+ tickets) or possibly Breaker of Armies or Brood Monitor if the pack is otherwise weak, and go from there, or if passed a somewhat late one of these cards then you can move in. I would not enter a draft thinking of drafting this deck, but if it falls into my lap then I will take it.
What I would try to avoid is splashing for another color because that dilutes the synergy and could lead to mana issues. There will bound to be some filler like Oran-Rief Invoker or Giant Spider but that is true with most any deck, and they fulfill a purpose as long as they do not hurt the curve much.
I have only drafted that deck once out of my 20-30 drafts (since I avoid green so much), and I was not able to get as many huge eldrazi I wanted (my 14 scions would have liked more than 1 7-drop and Ulamog), so that was probably an example of not enough support but in most drafts I pass plenty of 7+ drop eldrazi.
I am starting to work up some analysis of the draft so that I can release it when the draft is over.
I think there are lessons, and see what happens with the 2nd BFZ 8-Way.
Oh cool. I've never heard of it. Is it a draft simulator? I've tried some before, but don't know which is the best one.
In essence, it's a physical simulation of a draft (and I use actual packs I open as source material). It's quite realistic, but the tradeoff is that it is very slow. We only get to do 1-2 for each draft season.
We are currently on P3P2 of BFZ 8-Way #1.
I think this is the biggest problem is green. There's too many (or maybe not enough) card slots supporting archetypes that just aren't good. Eldrazi Ramp sucks unless you get Ulamog, and U/G converge sucks no matter what. Green's main strength in limited is combat/creature superiority but you don't get that in BFZ because the color it stretch too thin without many all-around solid commons that could go in any deck. Maybe if the archetypes were pushed or supported more they would work out, but it ended up diluting the pool of commons.